TRACK TECHNOLOGY & RAIL LIVE
A 10-point plan to improve track delivery and cut unit costs
1. Improve safety 2. Improve plant reliability 3. Improving planning and lock downs 4. Get engineering trains to site on time 5. Improve competence and multi-skilling 6. Re-organise into specialist teams 7. Re-tender contracts 8. Significant technology innovation 9. Improve scope and specification 10. Improve access
recently in his ‘track update’ for the industry, saying: “There was lots of learning about where we lost time. We will apply lean techniques to continuously improve to safely and reliably deliver 236 yards in an eight-hour possession.
From a plain line track renewals perspective this will be game-changing, as instead of booking long possessions at weekends we will be able to offer an alternative of night-time eight-hour possessions, which will hopefully allow more trains to operate for the weekend leisure market. From a supply chain perspective this means we mobilise four or five times per week rather than once at the weekend, so costs will increase in some areas, such as haulage.”
Track innovation ‘Core business’
Examples of significant technology innovation include modular slab track, micro-piling (“the nearest thing we have to a silver bullet”), RILA (the rail infrastructure alignment acquisition system by RailData), and S&C ballast treatment. Induction welding is another important advance, Featherstone said, admitting: “I said it would never work – but it’s the future! Especially in difficult locations where we can’t get the mobile flash butt welder in.”
But clearly such marginal gains are pointless if a vital piece of plant breaks down at the wrong moment – or if the engineering train is late (as 40% were last year), or if access isn’t available. A year ago, 81% of plans were not locked down a month before the work. That’s now down to 48%, but it remains a problem.
The flexible train arrival points can save 15 minutes per high output shift, allowing an extra 100m of production capacity.
Network Rail recently announced its decision to insource high output track renewal and ballast cleaning when the current contract with AmeyColas ends, with hundreds of staff becoming Network Rail employees.
We asked Featherstone for insight into that decision, and he said: “We did a 25-year business plan out to CP10. We needed five ballast cleaners, and two TRSs (track renewal system: Network Rail has TRS2, which came here in 2004 after being purpose-built for the UK network and gauge by Matisa in Switzerland, and the newer TRS4), for as long as we could see into the future.
“We are the third biggest operator of high output plant in the world. We had a unique model where we owned it and had staked hundreds of millions on the kit, but didn’t operate it and maintain it.
That causes
Featherstone praised the alliance with South West Trains that allowed longer possessions for the high output team, smashing lots of records in the process. Featherstone’s presentation slide made the point concisely: “10hrs access per night; ALO working; signallers stop trains on request when all-lines-blocked is required; opening at 50mph rather than 80mph; 700 yards per night on jointed track; 1,000 yards per night on continuously welded rail; every production record smashed.”
Alliance chief executive Tim Shoveller said: “This is a perfect example of how work that would once have required a weekend closure can now be done overnight during the week – meaning fewer bus replacements for passengers. Because we work as an Alliance we were able to work with the high-output team to maximise the benefits of their skills, giving them longer on the track, while rerouting and retiming trains to keep disruption to passengers to a minimum. As a result, our customers are enjoying a more comfortable and quiet ride, and with less disruption in the long-term.”
The latest record broken was on June 11, from 9pm to 4.50am, when the high output ballast cleaner managed 1km in a night. More than 1,000 tonnes of new stone was laid from 21 wagons in just under three hours.
tensions and sometimes confusion on what is a maintainable item, for example. Talking about getting reliability up, getting the commercials right – that is challenging. We own the kit, we should operate it. This isn’t a project-driven activity that we’d always use the supply chain for: it’s core maintenance. That’s what Network Rail does. If it’s core business, we felt we should do it ourselves.
“It was important that we announced it on the same day that we put out 10-year contracts for plain line and S&C [renewals]. That was trying to signal to the marketplace that we’ve done a high-level strategic review, this is what the market is best to deliver, because there’s peaks and troughs to manage, it’s projects-driven in nature, but high-output is core business.
“The important message is that this doesn’t set a precedent for the rest of Network Rail procurement. We’re still very committed to using the supply chain, and that’s the reason for events like Rail Live.”
Reorganisation
Point 6 on Featherstone’s list is reorganisation. Track renewal is currently being reorganised from geographically based teams that do everything into highly-experienced specialised teams that go where they are needed. Featherstone’s slide (pictured on the facing page) explains the changes best.
He added: “We’re an industry that’s confident about the future again – it’s probably been 100 years since we were as confident about the future as we are now.”
opinion@railtechnologymagazine.com TELL US WHAT YOU THINK
rail technology magazine Jun/Jul 14 | 109
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148